Friday, January 29, 2010

Osama Hearts Global Warming

Al-Qaida leader Osama bin Laden has called for the world to boycott American goods and the U.S. dollar, blaming the United States and other industrialized countries for global warming, according to a new audiotape released Friday.
My lord, how is this NOT something from the Onion?  So when Osama doesn't like our foreign policy towards his people, he's going to kill us and destroy our buildings, but when our policies threaten the extinction of man, he's going to boycott our stuff?  That bastard!  This means war!!!

And like, huh?  People who listen to Osama are heavy buyers of American goods?  That doesn't seem right in the first place.  I mean, his followers are pulling jihad on us, yet they're still buying our jeans?  Even Americans don't buy American, and we make the crap.  And hey, Osama, could you maybe have gone the boycott route first?  I mean, you go jihad, then boycott??  What's next, a stern letter?  Maybe you'll defriend us on Facebook?  Come on, dude.  Have a sense of proportion.

And finally, I really think the guy jumped the shark on this one, exposing that he really is a rightwing mouthpiece trying to make liberals look back.  "See, even OBL believes in Global Warming," they'll be saying.  And now the wingnuts will double-down with their beloved Ostrich Strategy, which has them ignore every problem that can't be solved with taxcuts, deregulation, or bombs. 

But now that Osama's picked sides in the Global Warming debate, I have no other choice than to do the exact opposite of what he says.  Fire of the factories, boys!  Let's smoke this mother out!!

Hopelessly Out of Touch

When did this happen?
Republicans delight in depicting President Barack Obama as hopelessly out of touch with average Americans, but the decision by the Republican National Committee to hold its winter meeting at a tropical resort is turning the accusation on its head.
I'm not sure I've seen anything remotely out of touch or elitist about Obama, while Republicans have been the party of Wall Street for decades upon decades, while its policy ideas are mired in an imaginary foundation that Reagan supposedly established thirty years ago and serve no practical purpose.  The bible has more relevant answers to our modern problems than these dummies do and the damn thing was written two thousand years ago by desert-dwellers who didn't even know what bacteria was.

So why does it take a dumb trip to Hawaii to turn the "out of touch" meme on its head?  Dude, Republicans were out of touch when Hoover ignored the greatest economic crisis in our country's history and they haven't looked back.  Hell, they still defend Hoover's policies.  Calling Republicans out of touch is like calling Lawrence Welk "old school."  Yet Politico is acting like this is something new.  As if they hadn't noticed that the Republican solution to our economic woes are tax cuts and deregulation for the rich...which also happens to be their cure for healthcare, poverty, crime, and the flu.  In fact, the only time they're not trying to help the rich is when they're helping the super-rich; which is most of the time.  This isn't something new.

But of course, Politico's idea for this is no better.  Sure, Republicans have no practical solutions of any merit as they don't even understand why they need to solve any problems, but...if they could hold their meetings in a crappy place like Baltimore, particularly during crappy weather; the optics would be gold.  And that's what it's all about with these dummies.  Apparently, it was a big negative for Obama to vacation in Hawaii, but now that Republicans are having a "meeting" there, it all evens out.  Finally, the Dems can level the playing field with their Average Joe breathren across the aisle.

And of course, that's where the joke is in all this: The only way the Republican Party could ever look in-touch is by comparison with the nitwit media.  And just in case any of my loyal readers are Baltimorians, I'm sure you have a fine city.  I just thought it was funny the way Politico used Baltimore as if it's the anti-Hawaii; a place so crappy it makes Republican policies more palatable if they're discussed there.  And yeah, the fact that I comfortably wore shorts outside today apparently makes me an out-of-touch elitist who doesn't understand the problems of real Americans.  What a bunch of bozos.

Thursday, January 28, 2010

Fact Checking the Fact Checkers

I really like to be told when I'm wrong, as well as seeing things from other perspectives; as that's the only way to really keep on top of my game.  And so I always make a point of reading the "fact check" pieces that Yahoo cites on their frontpage, as a way of knowing if Obama's lying to me.  But unfortunately, they rely upon the Associated Press, which relies upon bozos who have an extremely loose concept of "facts."  Apparently, it took six reporters to find nine items to fact check; little of which would require even minor corrections.

I'm not even going to bother doing a line-by-line fact check of this fact check, as almost every "correction" falls into one of two categories: Correcting claims that Obama never said and pointing out that Congress might not do what Obama wants it to do.  Like when they cite his claim that people can keep their health insurance under his plan, then call him to task because he didn't explain that insurance companies might raise costs or change the plans.  As if he said they wouldn't.

Or when Obama cited Congress's failure to form a Deficit Commission before saying that he's making one of his own; which is "fact checked" because Obama's commission won't be binding on Congress, while Congress's might have been.  And that's it.  It's not that Obama is lying; it's merely that he didn't explain how his commission might be different from the one Congress would have created.

And another time, they "fact checked" him because not everyone agrees that his policies saved two million jobs.  And because the CBO says it can't make such a determination, therefore Obama is wrong...or something.  And that's the weird thing about the fact check, in that they really don't seem to feel comfortable with the concept of facts, and seem to be calling him to task for making any factual claims at all. 

And I suspect that this is really what their big beef is.  It's not that Obama is a liar; it's that he's positing an objective reality, and that simply blows their minds.  Apparently, that's not what they teach in journalism school anymore.  Six reporters.  Six.  And this is the best they can do.  Is it any wonder an extremely unpopular political party can pretend to be masters of the universe when bozos like this are the gatekeepers of truth?

Wednesday, January 27, 2010

Electables Need Not Apply

A loyal reader recently suggested that the reason Romney won't get a presidential nomination is because he's Republican.  But as I've said before, I really don't see how that's an issue.  These people would vote for Karl Marx if he promised them he'd crush liberals. No, I think Romney's problem is that he just doesn't have any fire in him and comes off a bit flavorless for the hardcore conservatives (and this is a standard by which Mark Sanford is hardcore and flavored).
Part of this is that the RedState-style Republicans like to imagine that they have standards, and so they automatically place Romney as an Establishment goon that they'd never vote for; not because they wouldn't vote for him (they will), but because they like to pretend they have standards. But if Romney talked a better game, he'd woo them over. But the sort of fire-breathing he'd have to do would make him untouchable for anyone else (plus, he just doesn't have enough soul to pull it off), so that just won't happen. And that's a big reason why he'd be a better candidate than any of the jerks these people want
And that's why Obama has little to worry about: The base simply doesn't want anyone sane enough to be electable.  I just wish this was something more apparent to the Dem Establishment. 

The Solution to my Budget Deficit

I've found lately that I just never seem to have enough money.  So I've decided to fix that problem by earning less money, thereby forcing me to spend less.  That's just got to work.

Monday, January 25, 2010

AP Boosts Jindal, Despite Facts

I see the Associated Press continues to relish in its role as Republican propagada machine, with a fluff piece titled Anti-tax stance boosts Jindal despite budget woes.  But who is Jindal's anti-tax stance giving him a boost with?  The article never says.  While the article isn't a total fluff piece, the main gist is that he's really moving ahead, yet fails to say with whom.
It cites his high approval ratings in Louisiana, but those were already high; and are now a little lower than they were last year.  And if that were the case, you'd think the article might have mentioned his actual approval ratings; highlighting how they're now higher because of his anti-tax stance.  But no, many assertions of high approval, but nary a number in sight.  And after fifteen minutes of searching, the best I could find is an article which mentions him having 63% approval rating; though it fails to cite the source for that claim. 

The AP article even suggests that Obama's approval rating of 56% is a "dip"; yet that's only eight points lower than Jindal's rating.  And Obama's approval rating is national, while Jindal's is only for his home state; which is overwhelmingly conservative.  Yet the AP posits this as if this bodes well for Jindal, because he's remaining popular in his state, while Obama's popularity also remains steady.

But perhaps they're talking about a boost with Republicans.  And if they are, you'd think they'd include some sort of statistic to back up that claim.  But again, nothing.  And the latest poll of national Republicans I found showed that only 1% of them would vote for Jindal in a Republican primary; less than the 2% Newt Gingrich received.  Well, that wasn't the latest poll of Republicans, but merely the latest that included Jindal.  A more recent poll in January only included Palin, Romney, Gingrich, and "a candidate from the Tea Party movement."  To Fox News, who conducted the poll, Jindal was less mentionable than a generic candidate from an imaginary movement.  Ouch.

So basically, a half-term governor with no accomplishments, low national recognition, and a looming budget fiasco is getting a "boost," based on his anti-tax policy which deserves partial blame for the budget fiasco.  Brilliant work, AP.  At a time when your profession is becoming increasingly irrelevant, you stick with fluffy analysis pieces that any blogger could have tossed out; assuming they didn't like doing research or including facts.  And if this article has any influence, it'd be to give Jindal the boost that it asserted he already had.  I suspect that this was the point.

Corporate Cash Ain't So Bad

I wrote this on request on a comment from a loyal reader who wanted to know my thoughts on the SCOTUS corporate bribe cash decision, and thought I should just make it a post too.  And yes, I am posting again, now that I'm not doing the brain-intensive work I was doing for the past month or so; though I make no promises.  Frankly, I found no point in writing, as I figure that everything will work itself out; whether I write or not.  But after the panicky week some Dems have had, I suppose maybe I should calm things down.

Overall, I'm not worried. Things tend to balance themselves out, so if things get too out of hand, I figure Congress will step in to fix it. Plus, Dems are actually better for Big Business than Republicans are and I suspect we'll see quite a bit of this cash going to the Dem side. After all, it's not as if Big Money hadn't already infected Democratic coffers or policies. And if this drowns out enough little voices that even the Teabaggers feel impotent, we might find ourselves with the sort of campaign finance system we should have had all along.

And the main dynamic is that Big Business uses campaign cash to bribe Democrats to vote like Republicans, while Republicans extort it from Big Business by denying access to those who don't pay up. Sure, there are some conservative ideologue businessmen who willingly cough it up, but most of them don't give a damn who they give it to, just as long as they win. After all, there's no point in contributing to Republicans if they still can't get more than 30% approval ratings.

As things are, Dem politicos play nice because they still want that cash and lack the backbone to fight the system. But if they get beat up enough by corporate money, I have no doubt they'll finally find their spines.  But I doubt it'll come to that.  Corporate America already supports too many policies which are bad for Corporate America, and the more they let liberals fix our problems, the better it is for everyone.

What Zogby Asks

I randomly get emails to take Zogby's Interactive Poll and just got this question:
If the election for President of the United States were held today and the only candidates were Democrat Barack Obama and Republican Scott Brown, for whom would you vote?

My god, what in the hell is wrong with the media that anyone could possibly imagine this to be a legitimate question?  Had this been one of many similar questions positing different Republican opponents against Obama, this would have been silly.  But Brown was the only match-up they asked about, as if he's some magical Republican hero now that he won a special election against a lousy opponent.  Perspective really isn't the media's strong suit.

Saturday, January 23, 2010

Tea Party Money Becomes Irrelevant

The upside to SCOTUS's Corporate Free Speech ruling: The Tea Partiers' money is now irrelevent; thus completing the trifecta.  Their speech was embarrassing, their votes were worthless, and now their money will be drowned out.  For as much as Republicans were paying them lip service, it was certainly for the easy green, as they weren't good for anything else.  And now the GOP can go back to openly worshipping Big Business, rather than merely giving them BJ's in private.

Maybe now we can get better immigration laws, sensible economic policies, and get Corporate America out of the health insurance business; assuming they know what's good for them. 

Rightwing populism is dead!  Long live the Moneybags!

Thursday, January 21, 2010

John Edwards is a Douchebag

Wow, I just finished watching President Edwards' resignation speech for a third time and have to say, damn, it sure is too bad he didn't tell us about his lovechild before he won the nomination last year; back when we had a chance to do something about it.  And now that he finally fessed up about how he pressured his aide into pretending to be the baby's father and is handing the reins over to Vice President Lieberman (perhaps yet more mistaken judgment on his part), I've got to say that we're all royally screwed. 

2010 is really shaping up to be a bad year for Democrats.  First Edwards' overly ambitious stimulus bill was killed by Blue Dogs, then his push for single-payer healthcare went down in flames, and now this.  Jesus, who'd have imagined that a president would have been looking up to Bush's lousy approval ratings. 

Seriously though, Clinton lying about having sexual relations with that woman?  Understandable.  And had Lewinsky not been such a blabbermouth or Tripp not been such a witch, it was a smart decision to make.  I would have gone with honesty (or not screwing the intern in the first place), but I understand the decision nonetheless.  But lying about having a lovechild and then having his top aide pretend to be the daddy?  That easily makes Edwards the stupidest douchebag in politics. 

Seriously, how long did he imagine that lie would hold?  Was he really going to avoid seeing his daughter for the first nine years of her life?  That alone would make him Douchebag of the Decade.  "Sorry honey, Daddy wanted to go to your ballet recitals all those years, but I had to be president, so I hired a fake daddy instead.  Hope he was as good as I would have been."  Fucking jerk.

And the rule of lies is that, no matter how bad the truth is, if it'll eventually come out, it's better to just fess up and deal with the consequences.  And if he thought the consequences of having a lovechild would derail his presidential aspirations, then hiring the surrogate daddy to take the fall was much, much worse.  And there's simply no way any rational man would make such an imbecilic decision unless he was a completely amoral fuckface who could only think of himself. 

Praise be to Allah that He gave us Barack Obama instead.  For as bad as 2010 looks (and I daresay I like the way things look), things would have looked a whole heckeva lot worse had Edwards been president.

The Narcissist is "Stripped Bare"

But perhaps I've been unfair in my assessment, so I've decided to give the last word to Mr. Lying Asshole, as excerpted from a formal statement he issued last August.  And remember, this was well after any presidential aspirations had ended, yet his "full responsibilty" is a bit on the light side.  I hope the "apparent father" makes a decent bit of change off his book.  Enjoy!

I was and am ashamed of my conduct and choices, and I had hoped that it would never become public. With my family, I took responsibility for my actions in 2006 and today I take full responsibility publicly. But that misconduct took place for a short period in 2006. It ended then. I am and have been willing to take any test necessary to establish the fact that I am not the father of any baby, and I am truly hopeful that a test will be done so this fact can be definitively established. I only know that the apparent father has said publicly that he is the father of the baby. I also have not been engaged in any activity of any description that requested, agreed to or supported payments of any kind to the woman or to the apparent father of the baby.

It is inadequate to say to the people who believed in me that I am sorry, as it is inadequate to say to the people who love me that I am sorry. In the course of several campaigns, I started to believe that I was special and became increasingly egocentric and narcissistic. If you want to beat me up -- feel free. You cannot beat me up more than I have already beaten up myself. I have been stripped bare and will now work with everything I have to help my family and others who need my help.

I have given a complete interview on this matter and having done so, will have nothing more to say.

Monday, January 11, 2010

Biobrain for Palin

Now working with the Palin people.  Big things happening soon.  More news shortly.  Stay tuned...